oh, no, i understand that is a part of the model - but statistically speaking, it's still important to see the raw number of 'total sold'.
i'm curious how many repeat-purchases were made to support what you're talking about, but you're still going to need to see a 'total sold' number for that to mean anything.
i imagine that if radiohead does this again for their next album, that's all the proof we'll really need.
I find it interesting that you interpret that headline as a negative spin. I frequent drudge, not for the lean, but because there are usually interesting links to follow, regardless of spin - i have my own filter.
i see that as an accurate headline, possibly omitting the word 'fans', but not neccesarily so.
most people paid $0, it's a fact. the article goes on to say that there were a signigicant number of people who paid.
what's missing is the raw number of downloads. I'm really curious how much the grossed from this experiment, and how much it compares to, say, a standard industry payout.
i mean really, if 60% paid zero, and that's 60% of 1000 people, then they made $2400. that sucks. even if they'd averaged $6 across the full thousand, that's only 6 grand.
if 100000 people total downloaded it? w00t, $240,000. pretty good haul, i imagine.
all-in-all, i'm impressed by radiohead for taking the initiative to test these waters. i didn't download it, and i won't though.
someone would have to build and sell a phone that could use GSM and CDMA, and I don't think anyone in the US is willing to sell a product like that.
bear in mind that an EDGE network in New York is not an EDGE network in rural Missouri, and a 3G network in LA is not a 3G network in Idaho - not every carrier on every site has been built out to full capacity. for the network that will work best *WHERE YOU LIVE*, you need to do some real world testing. bring a laptop with you to the store, ask for a demo. you'd be surprised how many stores don't have optimal coverage.
i've been on an edge network in arkansas that rocked a 3g network in illinois, and i've been on a 3g network in north carolina that rocked an edge network in texas.
ah, an important bit to note. i am curious if in canada, like the united states, it is impossible to copyright any work of the government - it's all public domain.
would storing a legally purchased.mp3 on a raid array or on a system with an automated backup/recovery system constitute a violation? there would be copies (somewhat) naturally occurring, right?
i have to disagree. when an officer of the law comes knocking with a an official-looking document, legal or not, how can any individual (and you know that corporations are viewed in the eyes of the law as individuals, right?) decide whether or not to go along? there are plenty of legal wiretapping initiatives in place, and it's very easy to see the NSA, or some other branch decide to use these taps a)without a telco's knowledge, b)without a telco's explicit 'permission', and/or through misdirection/lying/whatever.
I don't think that the telco's should be immune, but i also think that they should have the ability to turn around and sue the NSA for exposing them to the legal issues in the first place.
think about it like this: a man comes to your door with a badge and a warrant, and says he needs to search your house. while in your house, he shoots your dog. it turns out, he's off-duty, actually an officer, and wrote the warrant himself - who is at fault for your dead dog?
you? for not examining the warrant? for letting him in? for acting in good faith? for not calling to confirm?
no. we need to believe that the authorities are acting lawfully to some extent. if the warrant is written in crayon, and his badge is upside-down, ok, you have reason to doubt...but we should all know that the NSA are pretty good at looking official. if you act in good faith in letting an officer in, and he commits a crime, he's at fault.
if the companies acted in good faith, point the lawyers at the source.
if we as a species are discussing this idea in earnest, why would little green men with technology advanced enough to fly here to submit us to probes? that this exists as a concept pretty quickly kills the idea that 'if we've been visited, we'd know about it.'
there exists a company called aircell which buys space on towers and points antennae straight up. the down-tilt antennae hardly see the signals from the sky as it is, and the uptilts handle all the traffic just fine. interference with cellular networks is not a real excuse, it's made up to sound important.
the so-called 'wired' phones in planes are analog cellular phones which use the aircell towers.
reading through all the negative responses, i can't help but wonder if there is also a genetic disposition in humans to deny the existance of gentic dispositions.
back on point, though, if this is true, and a 'God-fearing' gene exists, will we as a society better accept the removal of the gene, or the enhancement of the gene in future generations of genetically altered babies.
oooh, or how about in cattle? remove the gene, to guarantee that they're soulless, and we won't have to feel bad about eating them.
as a one-time employee of a smaller provider, and now as a bigger provider, i suggest that you first see if there are any smaller providers in your area willing to set up a repeater for you in/on your building.
if a customer made enough noise, and had a big enough account (tens of phones, maybe?) we could be swayed into helping out with signal propogation. if you start talking about using repeaters on your own, depending on the law in your area, you may force their hand, as an improperly tuned network could be degraded significantly by such a device (handoffs can act strangely, for instance)
also, using a repeater can have negative effects on positioning technology, if your provider is using a network-based e-911 solution.
one last thing - if the signal in your area is bad outside of your building, and it's a large enough area, offer to house a site on your property. you never know where that could lead - you might boost your signal, and get some monthly cash flow to boot.
stories like this one, and the story earlier today about the graphene transistor, make me wonder how far off truly organic computing is - and whether or not we'll eventually be indistinguishable from computers. or they from us.
who's to say that our bodies/brains aren't some elaborate computer design ala douglas adams' design?
Slashdot Mirror
don't torture me, bro!
HE STOLE CLIPPY!
oh, no, i understand that is a part of the model - but statistically speaking, it's still important to see the raw number of 'total sold'.
i'm curious how many repeat-purchases were made to support what you're talking about, but you're still going to need to see a 'total sold' number for that to mean anything.
i imagine that if radiohead does this again for their next album, that's all the proof we'll really need.
I find it interesting that you interpret that headline as a negative spin. I frequent drudge, not for the lean, but because there are usually interesting links to follow, regardless of spin - i have my own filter.
i see that as an accurate headline, possibly omitting the word 'fans', but not neccesarily so.
most people paid $0, it's a fact. the article goes on to say that there were a signigicant number of people who paid.
what's missing is the raw number of downloads. I'm really curious how much the grossed from this experiment, and how much it compares to, say, a standard industry payout.
i mean really, if 60% paid zero, and that's 60% of 1000 people, then they made $2400. that sucks. even if they'd averaged $6 across the full thousand, that's only 6 grand.
if 100000 people total downloaded it? w00t, $240,000. pretty good haul, i imagine.
all-in-all, i'm impressed by radiohead for taking the initiative to test these waters. i didn't download it, and i won't though.
i can hold a stack of eight ps3 units in my hand today. http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/17/1314221
is it just me, or does the image show 8 passengers and no pilot?
sure, fly it remotely to save costs, i know...but if the system was that good, why not put it into regular commercial aviation?
while this is true, you'd be hard pressed to find a (US) nationwide carrier serving up a 3g network on anything other than CDMA.
someone would have to build and sell a phone that could use GSM and CDMA, and I don't think anyone in the US is willing to sell a product like that.
bear in mind that an EDGE network in New York is not an EDGE network in rural Missouri, and a 3G network in LA is not a 3G network in Idaho - not every carrier on every site has been built out to full capacity. for the network that will work best *WHERE YOU LIVE*, you need to do some real world testing. bring a laptop with you to the store, ask for a demo. you'd be surprised how many stores don't have optimal coverage.
i've been on an edge network in arkansas that rocked a 3g network in illinois, and i've been on a 3g network in north carolina that rocked an edge network in texas.
edge != edge != edge.
just like realty, location, location, location.
ah, an important bit to note. i am curious if in canada, like the united states, it is impossible to copyright any work of the government - it's all public domain.
please direct me to the nearest .flac store.
.mp3 on a raid array or on a system with an automated backup/recovery system constitute a violation? there would be copies (somewhat) naturally occurring, right?
would storing a legally purchased
i have to disagree. when an officer of the law comes knocking with a an official-looking document, legal or not, how can any individual (and you know that corporations are viewed in the eyes of the law as individuals, right?) decide whether or not to go along? there are plenty of legal wiretapping initiatives in place, and it's very easy to see the NSA, or some other branch decide to use these taps a)without a telco's knowledge, b)without a telco's explicit 'permission', and/or through misdirection/lying/whatever. I don't think that the telco's should be immune, but i also think that they should have the ability to turn around and sue the NSA for exposing them to the legal issues in the first place. think about it like this: a man comes to your door with a badge and a warrant, and says he needs to search your house. while in your house, he shoots your dog. it turns out, he's off-duty, actually an officer, and wrote the warrant himself - who is at fault for your dead dog? you? for not examining the warrant? for letting him in? for acting in good faith? for not calling to confirm? no. we need to believe that the authorities are acting lawfully to some extent. if the warrant is written in crayon, and his badge is upside-down, ok, you have reason to doubt...but we should all know that the NSA are pretty good at looking official. if you act in good faith in letting an officer in, and he commits a crime, he's at fault. if the companies acted in good faith, point the lawyers at the source.
if we as a species are discussing this idea in earnest, why would little green men with technology advanced enough to fly here to submit us to probes? that this exists as a concept pretty quickly kills the idea that 'if we've been visited, we'd know about it.'
there exists a company called aircell which buys space on towers and points antennae straight up. the down-tilt antennae hardly see the signals from the sky as it is, and the uptilts handle all the traffic just fine. interference with cellular networks is not a real excuse, it's made up to sound important.
the so-called 'wired' phones in planes are analog cellular phones which use the aircell towers.
my computer told me not to read TFA. did i miss anything?
should i avoid products with high fructose maize syrup, then?
It's the Excel 97 easter egg.
reading through all the negative responses, i can't help but wonder if there is also a genetic disposition in humans to deny the existance of gentic dispositions. back on point, though, if this is true, and a 'God-fearing' gene exists, will we as a society better accept the removal of the gene, or the enhancement of the gene in future generations of genetically altered babies. oooh, or how about in cattle? remove the gene, to guarantee that they're soulless, and we won't have to feel bad about eating them.
as a one-time employee of a smaller provider, and now as a bigger provider, i suggest that you first see if there are any smaller providers in your area willing to set up a repeater for you in/on your building. if a customer made enough noise, and had a big enough account (tens of phones, maybe?) we could be swayed into helping out with signal propogation. if you start talking about using repeaters on your own, depending on the law in your area, you may force their hand, as an improperly tuned network could be degraded significantly by such a device (handoffs can act strangely, for instance) also, using a repeater can have negative effects on positioning technology, if your provider is using a network-based e-911 solution. one last thing - if the signal in your area is bad outside of your building, and it's a large enough area, offer to house a site on your property. you never know where that could lead - you might boost your signal, and get some monthly cash flow to boot.
'most fun bouncy castle ever'.
stories like this one, and the story earlier today about the graphene transistor, make me wonder how far off truly organic computing is - and whether or not we'll eventually be indistinguishable from computers. or they from us.
who's to say that our bodies/brains aren't some elaborate computer design ala douglas adams' design?
i'm pretty sure i had ken ono as a professor at the U of I in '95. He's a crafty man with long hair. i hated that class.